Every divorce is an assault on the family. Similarly, every act of infidelity is an assault on the family. The family is under assault, and has been, from its beginning. Recent developments are merely further manifestations of the dissolution of a nuclear institution but adultery and easy come easy go divorce for the sake of convenience and abortion on demand are even more widespread and insidious.
Divorce is a consequence of sin- whether it be the sin of infidelity or abuse. And at the end of the day it is sin itself which is destroying the family and every life and every person.
God is not pleased with sin and its consequences, howsoever and whensoever those consequences are manifested. Because God is not pleased when our foolish choices ruin our lives and the lives of those around us.
Only grace can rescue us. Left to our own devices, we are damned and doomed, along with the family and the family along with us.
Joe Lunceford from Georgetown College has some thoughts on the subject and he’s written them up for Bible and Interpretation. If the question is an important one to you, do read it.
As with every such issue I don’t think there’s one answer. If a pastor is divorced because his wife ran off with the milkman that’s one thing but if the Pastor is a serial marry-er than he clearly has no business being in the ministry at all.
Context is everything.
A Frenchman has been ordered to pay his ex-wife £8,500 in damages for failing to have enough sex with her during their marriage.
I guess she’s more concerned for money than self respect.
The 51-year-old man was fined under article 215 of France’s civil code, which states married couples must agree to a “shared communal life”. A judge has now ruled that this law implies that “sexual relations must form part of a marriage”. The rare legal decision came after the wife filed for divorce two years ago, blaming the break-up on her husband’s lack of activity in the bedroom. A judge in Nice, southern France, then granted the divorce and ruled the husband named only as Jean-Louis B. was solely responsible for the split. But the 47-year-old ex-wife then took him back to court demanding 10,000 euros in compensation for “lack of sex over 21 years of marriage”.
Where else would married couples be forced to have sex under threat of suit but France? And where else is a population so bereft of a proper theology that they view the sex act as the most important aspect of marriage?
The Telegraph says
Children with parents who divorce or separate before they are five are more likely to become binge drinkers when they reach 16 than children with parents who remain together, a major new study has found.
No act is an independent act. No not one. Every act, indeed, every sin is like a pebble tossed in a pond with ripples extending all around out from it.
Demos, the thinktank, has analysed the drinking habits of almost 32,000 people over three decades. It found that the style of a child’s upbringing has a marked impact on his or her alcohol consumption as a teenager and adult. As well as finding that children whose parents divorce are more likely to have “problematic drinking behaviors”, the study found that 16-year-olds with “disengaged parents” are over eight times more likely to drink excessively than children with parents who are more engaged. Conversely, high levels of parental warmth when a child is under five significantly reduce the chances that the child will drink excessively at the age of 16, Demos says.
According to the a study conducted by the University of Iowa, women who lost their virginity in their young teens are more likely to divorce. The study, published in the Journal of Marriage and Family, surveyed the responses of 3,793 women and found that 31 percent who lost their virginity as teens divorced within five years, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. On the flip side, the divorce rate for women who had waited to have sex was only 15 percent at the five year mark, and 27 percent by the time 10 years rolled around. But the study also found that a first sexual experience before the age of 16 — wanted or not — was still strongly associated with divorce.
It’s perfectly reasonable to presume that promiscuous teens will be promiscuous adults. It’s, further, perfectly sensible to presume that those who don’t value marriage or monogamy before being wed will not afterwards either.
There are serious consequences for the promiscuous that they too often simply disregard. To their own harm and heartache.
More evidence that divorce destroys. And let’s face it, most divorces, like most abortions, aren’t for the sake of someone else, they’re self indulgence perfected. To be sure, those in abusive relations should be divorced if they can’t overcome the abusiveness. No one should be mangled or maimed just for the sake of staying together.
On the other hand, though, too many divorces are just people who don’t want to stay together going their separate ways. Those divorces have serious consequences.
Children with divorced parents are at an increased risk of suicidal thoughts, with boys especially vulnerable to the effects of marital breakups. These new findings were revealed by the recent study, “Suicidal Ideation Among Individuals Whose Parents Have Divorced,” conducted by Esme Fuller-Thompson, a professor at the University of Toronto. Using a sample of 6.647 adults, 695 of whose parents had divorced before they were 18, Fuller-Thompson found that men from divorced households were three times as likely to have seriously considered suicide, while women had an 83 percent higher chance of having done the same.
Self centeredness simply for the sake of it is destructive and destruction.
I think it safe to confidently assert that all those deluded souls who married today just because they thought the date ‘meaningful’ will be divorced by 11-11-11. Marrying for any reason other than the fact that God has ‘joined them together’ ensures a marriage doomed to failure from the outset. It doesn’t matter what sort of maniacal interest there is in some numerical excuse.
In my estimation this is a proper ruling. If Texas forbids gay marriage (Florentine brides) then it stands to reason that they don’t grant gay divorces. Since such marriages aren’t even recognized as legitimate, it would be folly to grant divorces to non-existent marriages.
Gay couples legally married in other states cannot get a divorce in Texas, where same-sex marriage is banned, a state appeals court ruled Tuesday. The 5th Texas Court of Appeals ruled that a Dallas district court judge didn’t have the authority to hear a divorce case involving two Dallas men who married in Massachusetts in 2006. Republican state Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office had appealed after Judge Tena Callahan, a Democrat, said she did have jurisdiction and dismissed the state’s attempt to intervene. “Today’s court of appeals decision overruled the district court’s improper ruling, confirmed the constitutionality of Texas’ traditional definition of marriage and correctly found that Texas courts lack the legal authority to grant divorces to same-sex couples,” said Abbott spokesman Jerry Strickland.
The appeals court couldn’t have found otherwise.
Callahan also had ruled Texas couldn’t limit marriage to a man and a woman, but the appeals court said the state’s same-sex marriage ban was constitutional. “A person does not and cannot seek a divorce without simultaneously asserting the existence and validity of a lawful marriage,” Justice Kerry P. Fitzgerald wrote on behalf of three Republican appeals court justices. “Texas law, as embodied in our constitution and statutes, requires that a valid marriage must be a union of one man and one woman, and only when a union comprises one man and one woman can there be a divorce under Texas law.”
Yup- the only proper ruling for certain.